Canada Case Law

R. v. Davina

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The judge found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused deliberately selected and used a heavy 18-inch crescent wrench to strike the victim multiple times with force sufficient to cause death; the evidence did not establish advanced intoxication negating capacity and there was no air of reality to provocation; accordingly the accused had the specific intent required under s.229(a)(ii) and was guilty of second-degree murder.

Source excerpt

• Mens rea
• Second-degree murder (s.229(a)(ii))
• Intoxication defence
• Provocation (s.232)
• Cumulative/rolled-up effect

Read case analysis

R. v. Nazir

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge's findings that the appellant intended to cause death were supported by the totality of the evidence (verbal death threats, following victims upstairs, bringing knives, attempting to force open the bathroom door) and were not displaced by toxicology evidence or alleged opinion evidence; the judge did not misapply the law on intoxication or improperly rely on demeanour opinion, and the 13-year sentence was not demonstrably unfit.

Source excerpt

• Attempted murder
• Aggravated assault
• Uttering threats
• Failure to comply with probation
• Mens rea
• Voluntariness of statements

Read case analysis

R. v. Kahnapace

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the Crown’s conceded appeal, set aside Martha May Kahnapace’s second-degree murder conviction, and ordered a new trial.

• Mens rea
• Second degree murder
• Intoxication defence
• Common sense inference
• Jury charge error
• Curative proviso

Read case analysis

R. v. Lincoln

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Voir dire ruling admitting blame-shifting statements as post-offence conduct, but excluding any statement that the accused said she was going to kill someone.

• Post-offence conduct
• Consciousness of guilt
• Admissibility
• Prejudice vs probative
• Judicial editing of statements
• Jury instruction

Read case analysis

R. v. Robson

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge did not err: the evidence of severe head trauma and causation permitted a common sense inference that death was a likely consequence of the appellant's actions, and when read as a whole the charge, including repeated statements that the Crown bore the burden beyond a reasonable doubt and a faultless W.(D.) instruction, did not place an onus on the defence regarding intoxication; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Murder vs. manslaughter
• Common sense inference
• Intoxication and intent
• Burden of proof
• W.(d.) instruction
• Causation

Read case analysis

R. v. F.(K.)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court ordered the defence to provide further particulars of proposed expert evidence on intoxication, intent, and mental state after finding non-compliance with Criminal Code notice requirements.

• Section 657.3 criminal code notice requirements
• Admissibility and scope of expert psychiatric evidence
• Intoxication and formation of intent
• Court powers to order particulars
• Expert-evidence
• Intoxication

Read case analysis

R. v. Brizard

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge erred in principle by treating the appellant's plea to manslaughter as fully accounting for intoxication contrary to R v Stone and by failing to give adequate weight to the appellant's aboriginal status pursuant to s.718.2(e) and the Gladue/Wells jurisprudence; accordingly the sentence was reduced to reflect those mitigating considerations and available restorative options.

Source excerpt

• Manslaughter
• Sentencing principles
• Gladue analysis
• Intoxication as mitigation
• Restorative sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. Wilson

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal from a second-degree murder conviction, holding the jury charge adequately linked intoxication evidence to the presumption of intent.

• Intoxication
• Presumption of intent
• Jury instructions
• Second degree murder
• Presumption-of-intent
• Jury-instructions

Read case analysis

R. v. Green

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Sentencing judgment for manslaughter arising from a cocaine-induced psychotic episode; the court imposed seven years’ imprisonment, with credit for pre-trial custody.

• Manslaughter
• Self-induced intoxication
• Sentencing principles
• Aggravating and mitigating factors
• Psychiatric evidence
• Pre-trial custody credit

Read case analysis

R. v. Leming

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is allowed because the trial judge failed to adequately direct the jury to consider the cumulative effect of intoxication, provocation and excessive force on intent and self‑defence, creating a real possibility of a miscarriage of justice; conviction set aside and new trial ordered.

Source excerpt

• Jury charge
• Mens rea
• Cumulative effect of defences
• Miscarriage of justice

Read case analysis